the psychology of revolution-第56章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



people；　of　which　the　people　know　nothing；　and　by　the　application

of　which　they　would　have　nothing　to　gain。　　Although　the　working…

man　possesses　the　theoretical　right　of　passing　the　barriers　which

separate　him　from　the　upper　classes　by　a　whole　series　of

competitions　and　examinations；　his　chance　of　reaching　them　is　in

reality　extremely　slight。



The　democracy　of　the　lettered　classes　has　no　other　object　than　to

set　up　a　selection　which　shall　recruit　the　directing　classes

exclusively　from　themselves。　　I　should　have　nothing　to　say

against　this　if　the　selection　were　real。　　It　would　then

constitute　the　application　of　the　maxim　of　Napoleon：　　‘‘The　true

method　of　government　is　to　employ　the　aristocracy；　but　under　the

forms　of　democracy。''



Unhappily　the　democracy　of　the　‘‘intellectuals''　would　simply

lead　to　the　substitution　of　the　Divine　right　of　kings　by　the

Divine　right　of　a　petty　oligarchy；　which　is　too　often　narrow　and

tyrannical。　　Liberty　cannot　be　created　by　replacing　a　tyranny。



Popular　democracy　by　no　means　aims　at　manufacturing　rulers。　

Dominated　entirely　by　the　spirit　of　equality　and　the　desire　to

ameliorate　the　lot　of　the　workers；　it　rejects　the　idea　of

fraternity；　and　exhibits　no　anxiety　in　respect　of　liberty。　　No

government　is　conceivable　to　popular　democracy　except　in　the　form

of　an　autocracy。　　We　see　this；　not　only　in　history；　which　shows

us　that　since　the　Revolution　all　despotic　Governments　have　been

vigorously　acclaimed；　but　also　in　the　autocratic　fashion　in　which

the　workers'　trades　unions　are　conducted。



This　profound　distinction　between　the　democracy　of　the　lettered

classes　and　popular　democracy　is　far　more　obvious　to　the　workers

than　to　the　intellectuals。　　In　their　mentalities　there　is　nothing

in　common；　the　two　classes　do　not　speak　the　same　language。　　The

syndicalists　emphatically　assert　to…day　that　no　alliance　could

possibly　exist　between　them　and　the　politicians　of　the

bourgeoisie。　　This　assertion　is　strictly　true。



It　was　always　so；　and　this；　no　doubt；　is　why　popular

democracy；　from　Plato's　to　our　own　times；　has　never　been　defended

by　the　great　thinkers。



This　fact　has　greatly　struck　Emile　Faguet。　　‘‘Almost　all　the

thinkers　of　the　nineteenth　century；''　he　says；　‘‘were　not

democrats。　　When　I　was　writing　my　Politiques　et　moralistes　du

XIXe　siecle　this　was　my　despair。　　I　could　not　find　one　who　had

been　a　democrat；　yet　I　was　extremely　anxious　to　find　one　so　that

I　could　give　the　democratic　doctrine　as　formulated　by　him。''



The　eminent　writer　might　certainly　have　found　plenty　of

professional　politicians；　but　these　latter　rarely　belong　to　the

category　of　thinkers。





2。　　Natural　Inequalities　and　Democratic　Equalisation。





The　difficulty　of　reconciling　democratic　equalisation　with

natural　inequalities　constitutes　one　of　the　most　difficult

problems　of　the　present　hour。　　We　know　what　are　the　desires　of

democracy。　　Let　us　see　what　Nature　replies　to　these　demands。



The　democratic　ideas　which　have　so　often　shaken　the　world　from

the　heroic　ages　of　Greece　to　modern　times　are　always　clashing

with　natural　inequalities。　　Some　observers　have　held；　with

Helvetius；　that　the　inequality　between　men　is　created　by

education。



As　a　matter　of　fact；　Nature　does　not　know　such　a　thing　as

equality。　　She　distributes　unevenly　genius；　beauty；　health；

vigour；　intelligence；　and　all　the　qualities　which　confer　on　their

possessors　a　superiority　over　their　fellows。



No　theory　can　alter　these　discrepancies；　so　that　democratic

doctrines　will　remain　confined　to　words　until　the　laws　of

heredity　consent　to　unify　the　capacities　of　men。



Can　we　suppose　that　societies　will　ever　succeed　in　establishing

artificially　the　equality　refused　by　Nature？



A　few　theorists　have　believed　for　a　long　time　that　education

might　effect　a　general　levelling。　　Many　years　of　experience　have

shown　the　depth　of　this　illusion。



It　would　not；　however；　be　impossible　for　a　triumphant　Socialism

to　establish　equality　for　a　time　by　rigorously　eliminating　all

superior　individuals。　　One　can　easily　foresee　what　would　become

of　a　people　that　had　suppressed　its　best　individuals　while

surrounded　by　other　nations　progressing　by　means　of　their　best

individuals。



Not　only　does　Nature　not　know　equality；　but　since　the　beginning

of　the　ages　she　has　always　realised　progress　by　means　of

successive　differentiationsthat　is　to　say；　by　increasing

inequalities。　　These　alone　could　raise　the　obscure　cell　of　the

early　geological　periods　to　the　superior　beings　whose　inventions

were　to　change　the　face　of　the　earth。



The　same　phenomenon　is　to　be　observed　in　societies。　　The　forms　of

democracy　which　select　the　better　elements　of　the　popular　classes

finally　result　in　the　creation　of　an　intellectual　aristocracy；　a

result　the　contrary　of　the　dream　of　the　pure　theorists；　to　beat

down　the　superior　elements　of　society　to　the　level　of　the

inferior　elements。



On　the　side　of　natural　law；　which　is　hostile　to　theories　of

equality；　are　the　conditions　of　modern　progress。　　Science　and

industry　demand　more　and　more　considerable　intellectual

efforts；　so　that　mental　inequalities　and　the　differences　of

social　condition　which　spring　from　them　cannot　but　become

accentuated。



We　therefore　observe　this　striking　phenomenon：　as　laws　and

institutions　seek　to　level　individuals　the　progress　of

civilisation　tends　still　further　to　differentiate　them。　　From　the

peasant　to　the　feudal　baron　the　intellectual　difference　was　not

great；　but　from　the　working…man　to　the　engineer　it　is　immense　and

is　increasing　daily。



Capacity　being　the　principal　factor　of　progress；　the　capable　of

each　class　rise　while　the　mediocre　remain　stationary　or　sink。　

What　could　laws　do　in　the　face　of　such　inevitable　necessities？



In　vain　do　the　incapable　pretend　that；　representing　number；　they

also　represent　force。　　Deprived　of　the　superior　brains　by　whose

researches　all　workers　profit；　they　would　speedily　sink　into

poverty　and　anarchy。



The　capital　role　of　the　elect　in　modern　civilisation　seems

too　obvious　to　need　pointing　out。　　In　the　case　of　civilised

nations　and　barbarian　peoples；　which　contain　similar　averages　of

mediocrities；　the　superiority　of　the　former　arises　solely　from

the　superior　minds　which　they　contain。　　The　United　States　have

understood　this　so　thoroughly　that　they　forbid　the　immigration　of

Chinese　workers；　whose　capacity　is　identical　with　that　of

American　workers；　and　who；　working　for　lower　wages；　tend　to

create　a　formidable　competition　with　the　latter。　　Despite　these

evidences　we　see　the　antagonism　between　the　multitude　and　the

elect　increasing　day　by　day。　　At　no　period　were　the　elect　more

necessary；　yet　never　were　they　supported　with　such　difficulty。



One　of　the　most　solid　foundations　of　Socialism　is　an　intense

hatred　of　the　elect。　　Its　adepts　always　forget　that　scientific；

artistic；　and　industrial　progress；　which　creates　the　strength　of

a　country　and　the　prosperity　of　millions　of　workers；　is　due

solely　to　a　small　number　of　superior　brains。



If　the　worker　makes　three　times　as　much　to…day　as　he　did　a

hundred　years　ago；　and　enjoys　commodities　then　unknown　to　great

nobles；　he　owes　it　entirely　to　the　elect。



Suppose　that　by　some　miracle　Socialism　had　been　universally

accepted　a　century　ago。　　Risk；　speculation；　initiativein　a

word；　all　the　stimulants　of　human　activitybeing　suppressed；　no

progress　would　have　been　possible；　and　the　worker　would　have

remained　as　poor　as　he　was。　　Men　would　merely　have　established

that　equality　in　poverty　desired　by　the　jealousy　and　envy　of　a

host　of　mediocre　minds。　　Humanity　will　never　renounce　the

progress　of　civilisation　to　satisfy　so　low　an　ideal。







CHAPTER　II



THE　RESULTS　OF　DEMOCRATIC　EVOLUTION



1。　　The　Influence　upon　Social　Evolution　of　Theories　of　no

Rational　Value。



We　have　seen　that　natural　laws　do　not　agree　with　the　aspirations